Direct generation of protein conformational ensembles via machine learning
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Dynamics and conformational sampling are essential for linking protein structure to biological function. While challenging to probe experimentally, computer simulations are widely used to describe protein dynamics, but at significant computational costs that continue to limit the systems that can be studied. Here, we demonstrate that machine learning can be trained with simulation data to directly generate physically realistic conformational ensembles of proteins without the need for any sampling and at negligible computational cost. As a proof-of-principle we train a generative adversarial network based on a transformer architecture with self-attention on coarse-grained simulations of intrinsically disordered peptides. The resulting model, idpGAN, can predict sequence-dependent coarse-grained ensembles for sequences that are not present in the training set demonstrating that transferability can be achieved beyond the limited training data. We also retrain idpGAN on atomistic simulation data to show that the approach can be extended in principle to higher-resolution conformational ensemble generation.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 59 · Cited by 192
- Authors
- Janson, G., Valdes-Garcia, G., Heo, L., & Feig, M.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Feig, Michael
- Venue
- Nature Communications
- Published
- 2023-02-11
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 774-774
- ISSN
- 2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9922302
- OpenAlex
- W4320040108
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 57 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 16.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35 GM126948)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
- Keywords
- protein conformational ensembles, generative adversarial networks, transformer models, self-attention, intrinsically disordered peptides, coarse-grained simulation, atomistic simulation, transferability, protein dynamics
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Peptides, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Molecular Dynamics Simulation, Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review